Welcome to HVAC-Talk.com, a non-DIY site and the ultimate Source for HVAC Information & Knowledge Sharing for the industry professional! Here you can join over 150,000 HVAC Professionals & enthusiasts from around the world discussing all things related to HVAC/R. You are currently viewing as a NON-REGISTERED guest which gives you limited access to view discussions

To gain full access to our forums you must register; for a free account. As a registered Guest you will be able to:

Participate in over 40 different forums and search/browse from nearly 3 million posts.

I hope you two aren't lumping me in with that crowd. I'm all for the 2nd Amendment.
If you've read any of my posts you would know that.
I don't fear anyone that carries a side arm. In fact I feel safer. I'm only pointing out that it is unusual for someone to be purchasing so much gear and ammunition, that somewhere along the line a red flag should have went up.

As noted in my posts... I was not focusing on a/any person... rather the liberal mindset of blaming guns rather than people for behavior.

To put the world in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must cultivate our personal life; and to cultivate our personal life, we must first set our hearts right.

And what is the point of cops having guns if the bullets just bounce off like the man of steel? Just gave the reasoning for the law up here, as I said, the only civilians here that need to wear it (other than cops and security guards) are the ones that want to behave in a way that attracts bullets.

As far as being anti-weapon. I sure do have some pretty ones.

if the bullets just bounce off like the man of steel?

your kidding right? ever talk to someone that has been shot with body armor on. There is BulletPROOF and bulletRESISTANT

There are four levels of protection, as follows: From Global Security dot org

Type I (.22 LR; .380 ACP). This armor protects against .22 long rifle lead round nose (LR LRN) bullets, with nominal masses of 2.6 g (40 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 320 m/s (1050 ft/s) or less, and against .380 ACP full metal jacketed round nose (FMJ RN), with nominal masses of 6.2 g (95 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 312 m/s (1025 ft/s) or less. Type I body armor is light. This is the minimum level of protection every officer should have, and the armor should be routinely worn at all times while on duty. Type I body armor was the armor issued during the NIJ demonstration project in the mid-1970s. Most agencies today, however, because of increasing threats, opt for a higher level of protection.

Type II-A (9mm; .40 S&W). This armor protects against 9mm full metal jacketed round nose (FMJ RN) bullets, with nominal masses of 8.0 g (124 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 332 m/s (1090 ft/s) or less, and .40 S&W caliber full metal jacketed (FMJ) bullets, with nominal masses of 11.7 g (180 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 312 m/s (1025 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against Type I threats. Type II-A body armor is well suited for full-time use by police departments, particularly those seeking protection for their officers from lower velocity 9mm and 40 S&W ammunition.

Type II (9mm; .357 Magnum). This armor protects against 9mm full metal jacketed round nose (FMJ RN) bullets, with nominal masses of 8.0 g (124 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 358 m/s (1175 ft/s) or less, and .357 Magnum jacketed soft point (JSP) bullets, with nominal masses of 10.2 g (158 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 427 m/s (1400 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against Type I and Type IIA threats. Type II body armor is heavier and more bulky than either Types I or II-A. It is worn full time by officers seeking protection against higher velocity .357 Magnum and 9mm ammunition.

Type III-A (High Velocity 9mm; .44 Magnum). This armor protects against 9mm full metal jacketed round nose (FJM RN) bullets, with nominal masses of 8.0 g (124 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 427 m/s (1400 ft/s) or less, and .44 Magnum jacketed hollow point (JHP) bullets, with nominal masses of 15.6 g (240 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 427 m/s (1400 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against most handgun threats, as well as the Type I, II-A, and II threats. Type III-A body armor provides the highest level of protection currently available from concealable body armor and is generally suitable for routine wear in many situations. However, users located in hot, humid climates may need to evaluate the use of Type III-A armor carefully.

Type III (Rifles). This armor protects against 7.62mm full metal jacketed (FMJ) bullets (U.S. military designation M80), with nominal masses of 9.6 g (148 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 838 m/s (2750 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against Type I through III-A threats. Type III body armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection, such as barricade confrontations involving sporting rifles.

Type IV (Armor Piercing Rifle). This armor protects against .30 caliber armor piercing (AP) bullets (U.S. military designation M2 AP), with nominal masses of 10.8 g (166 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 869 m/s (2850 ft/s) or less. It also provides at least single-hit protection against the Type I through III threats. Type IV body armor provides the highest level of protection currently available. Because this armor is intended to resist "armor piercing" bullets, it often uses ceramic materials. Such materials are brittle in nature and may provide only single-shot protection, since the ceramic tends to break up when struck. As with Type III armor, Type IV armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection.

Bulletproof and bullet resistant vests NIJ Flexible Level III & IV High Power Rifle Body Armor, are subject to the export licensing authority of the U.S. Department of State, Office of Defense Trade Controls.

I am not saying guns should be made illegal but the above comparison is silly because anything can move food into Oprah’s mouth. But what readily available device can blow a person brains out the back of their head from a distance by simply moving your index finger a quarter of an inch?

There should be a limit on how easy man can kill another man, but I am not saying outlawing guns is the answer either. Maybe outlawing assault rifles is a first step? But it is the NRA’s stance to never give an inch.

If we had the capability to think someone to death should it be made legal? Because guns are very similar to that.

I am not saying guns should be made illegal but the above comparison is silly because anything can move food into Oprah’s mouth. But what readily available device can blow a person brains out the back of their head from a distance by simply moving your index finger a quarter of an inch?

There should be a limit on how easy man can kill another man, but I am not saying outlawing guns is the answer either. Maybe outlawing assault rifles is a first step? But it is the NRA’s stance to never give an inch.

If we had the capability to think someone to death should it be made legal? Because guns are very similar to that.

What do you consider an "assault rifle"? That is a name and classification invented by the anti-gun people to serve their political purposes.

I happen to hunt with one of those so called "assault rifles" as do many thousands of other americans. I also own other rifles that the liberal anti-gun people do not consider an assault rifle and those other rifles fire the same rounds at the same rate. The anti-gun crowd and most politicians have no real firearm knowledge and the media has no idea what they are talking about when it comes to firearm knowledge. All they know is they want all guns regulated and of course the bad guys don't follow regulations in the first place.

So all anti-gun regulations do is declaw the cat so it can't defend itself against the pit bull.

The anti-gun crowd and most politicians have no real firearm knowledge and the media has no idea what they are talking about when it comes to firearm knowledge. All they know is they want all guns regulated and of course the bad guys don't follow regulations in the first place.

So all anti-gun regulations do is declaw the cat so it can't defend itself against the pit bull.

Great point. The suspect in this case according to reports has I think it was 2 handguns, a shotgun and an "assault rifle". Against unarmed, unarmoured victums from a short range, without anyone returning fire, does it really matter that much what type of gun he had? I guess you could argue that a semi-automatic rifle lays down more rounds and cna penetrate soft objects like walls and chairs. A good marksman with a handgun can probably do just as much damage.

And as mentioned, bad guys don't follow legal channels for weapons purchases. The guy cold have just as easily thrown a 4 or 5 bundles of exposives into the crowd and walked out too or walked into the middle of the aisle and blown himself up.

I would like ot see more details. Ther were at least 2 service members killed. It's not clear if anyone did attempt to fight back and was killed. Also consider the situation and social dynamics. I woudl venture ot say that most of the movigoers wre with a friend, date or family member. Would you abandon them and attempt a potentially suicide assault, or try and guide them to safety.

Consider that a theater is a large room, it woudl seem reasonable that you mgith be able in a large crowd to beat the odds and make it to a exit. In a smaller space, like an airplane or classroom, you are more cornered.

It's dark, and the suspect has good visbility of the entire room from up front and may have had the bright screen shining behind him making his movement difficult to make out.

Trying to put together a plan to attack the individual that no moving in a location where it's hard to outflank them without the ability to easily coordinate an assult with more than one individual seems tricky to me. I think a rational person might have figured their best bet was to stay hidden behind the chairs and wait for back-up.

Consider this, in a filled to capacity theater with maybe 300 people only 20 or so probably have the right personality type to fight back. 1/2 of them would be in the back 1/2 of the theater and out of reasonable range ot respond. 1/2 of the remaining 10 might have already had someone they knew shot and were attending to them, or focused on trying to protect them. So that leave 4 or 5 that might reasonably be able to fight back.